Splitboard.com Forums

The World's first exclusive splitboard discussion forums






It is currently Wed Oct 22, 2014 5:04 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2014 9:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:34 pm
Posts: 303
Location: kelowna bc canada
barrows wrote:
Yeah, Spark is certainly going to be more affordable than Phantom, and perhaps a good option for those folks who do not take their riding too seriously...
But, they will not come close to the ride performance which Phantom offers; the precision of the Phantom interface is in another league from anything which relies on the Voile Pucks.


I think that comment has the potential to piss off about 99.9 % of the people on this forum :headbang:
Met Keffler during the Canuck splitfest, great guy and glad he came up with a product that eliminated one of the reasons people trash talked hardboots.
But now its time for an objective test so to speak.Anybody who owns a set of phantoms and is abit handy I'd love to see how much deflection there is in the bindings by placing a bending moment on the board halves. Clamp one side of the board solid and load two ten pound weights one foot from the center of the board, located at each binding measure the distance the interface flex one foot away from the center of the board with a dial indicater.
Time to man up barrows with all this trash talk of other systems, I want to see numbers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2014 10:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:20 pm
Posts: 316
Dudes I have prowder saddles.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2014 12:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1519
Location: Colorado
vapor wrote:
barrows wrote:
Yeah, Spark is certainly going to be more affordable than Phantom, and perhaps a good option for those folks who do not take their riding too seriously...
But, they will not come close to the ride performance which Phantom offers; the precision of the Phantom interface is in another league from anything which relies on the Voile Pucks.


I think that comment has the potential to piss off about 99.9 % of the people on this forum :headbang:
Met Keffler during the Canuck splitfest, great guy and glad he came up with a product that eliminated one of the reasons people trash talked hardboots.
But now its time for an objective test so to speak.Anybody who owns a set of phantoms and is abit handy I'd love to see how much deflection there is in the bindings by placing a bending moment on the board halves. Clamp one side of the board solid and load two ten pound weights one foot from the center of the board, located at each binding measure the distance the interface flex one foot away from the center of the board with a dial indicater.
Time to man up barrows with all this trash talk of other systems, I want to see numbers.


Well if the truth pisses people off, what can I say about it? We all need to face the truth sometimes.
There is good reason why Karakoram, Phantom, Ranger, and now Plum have all gone to great efforts to design and produce new splitboard interface systems: because the Voile puck system, while adequate in its day, is antiquated and has its limitations. Voile pucks flex quite a bit, not only that, occasionally they break in half, it has happened to me. Now I have no experience with Prowder, I have my own reservations about them, but without any experience that is only speculative, so I will not suggest that they have the same issues as Voile pucks.
I have participated in the kind of testing you are talking about, and the results were clear. What is even more clear is the precision of the ride with Phantom Bindings.
What some may fail to realize is how much thought and engineering has gone into Phantom bindings. They are designed specifically to have precise stiff control across the board from toe to heel (edge to edge), and to allow for a degree of controlled flex towards the tip and tail, and to precisely transfer rider forces from the boot to the board with no slop (but with a small amount of controlled flex). The transfer of dynamic riding forces, in three dimensions, is what this is all about-bench testing can tell one some things, but the true test is in the riding. I am not aware of a single rider who after trying Phantom bindings went back to a Voile puck based system-I could never go back, as it would be a step backwards.

The correct way to objectively test and measure this system is with a boot clipped in the binding (as the boot itself is part of the system which provides the support) and a lever in the shaft of the boot to apply the force. And then of course, subjective riding response tests should also be done as how it rides is really what matters, and their is no way to truly measure all the dynamic forces at play on a test bench (OK, maybe there is a way, but it would be well beyond what anyone here is going to have the budget for).

I am not trashing the Voile puck system, I rode with them for quite a few years, and certainly they did work (except when they broke in half). But, advancements in gear come as time goes on, this is normal, and really should not piss off an intelligent human.

_________________
Never Summer Prospector 167X, furberg 173 DIY, Dynafit TLT5/6 Mountain , Phantom Bindings, BD Glidelite Skins
Quiver Killer inserts

http://protectourwinters.org/
http://14ersnowboardproject.homestead.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2014 10:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:34 pm
Posts: 303
Location: kelowna bc canada
Who said i rode voile???. I have no problem with saying that Phantoms are a good system. what I have a problem with is you trash talking other peoples gear and doing exactly what previous people did to hardbooters, your seriously saying that the people like Liz dee, Kyle Miller, BG Knight and such aren't "serious" about splitboarding?
If you can can design and build and interface you should be able to do some objective testing as well.So in the binding section I'll walk you through it and do it on the cheap so anybody willing to put in a bit of effort can do it and we can compare results.
What can I say, I'm bored, cranky and looking for a fight and calling you out but mostly love to see objectively how interfaces compare.


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2014 12:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1519
Location: Colorado
vapor wrote:
Who said i rode voile???. I have no problem with saying that Phantoms are a good system. what I have a problem with is you trash talking other peoples gear and doing exactly what previous people did to hardbooters, your seriously saying that the people like Liz dee, Kyle Miller, BG Knight and such aren't "serious" about splitboarding?
If you can can design and build and interface you should be able to do some objective testing as well.So in the binding section I'll walk you through it and do it on the cheap so anybody willing to put in a bit of effort can do it and we can compare results.
What can I say, I'm bored, cranky and looking for a fight and calling you out but mostly love to see objectively how interfaces compare.


Image


All of my comments pertained to the Voile Puck system. There is a good reason riders like Liz Daily and Brooks Goodnight ride the Karakoram Interface. I never "trashed" the Karakoram system, my criticism was that Voile Pucks flex, and occasionally break, and that they do not provide as a precise a ride as the Phantom interface does. Please do not put words in my mouth which I did not utter. I do find it instructive that the new Karakoram Prime system has a re-designed interface plate which is very, very similar in design to Phantom: good for them, they now offer better stance adjustability because of this change, hopefully ride performance is improved as well (the original system did not overlap the board halves on both sides, and the interface plates were a little more flex than I would prefer. Hopefully the have switched to using more 7075 aluminum as well...
DIY style pucks, custom drilled for your stance, with overlaps of both board halves, as it appears yours are, are miles better than the Voile System, right? Otherwise I doubt that you would have gone to the effort to create them. The is not something one can easily purchase and set up for their board though, without custom drilling and such. For me, a good interface provides both ease of set up, ability to adjust stance width.setback in fine increments, and independent adjustment of stance angle and width/setback.

_________________
Never Summer Prospector 167X, furberg 173 DIY, Dynafit TLT5/6 Mountain , Phantom Bindings, BD Glidelite Skins
Quiver Killer inserts

http://protectourwinters.org/
http://14ersnowboardproject.homestead.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2014 2:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:34 pm
Posts: 303
Location: kelowna bc canada
Sorry for the thread drift.
This got me thinking that I will take one of my old boards and do an experiment between to calculate flex on a diy,Voile and Phantom like interface and graft the results with different loads.Using the same board and setup should provide for less variables in the test and then post it up in the binding section.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Fri May 16, 2014 8:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:40 pm
Posts: 97
Location: Colorado
vapor wrote:
Sorry for the thread drift.
This got me thinking that I will take one of my old boards and do an experiment between to calculate flex on a diy,Voile and Phantom like interface and graft the results with different loads.Using the same board and setup should provide for less variables in the test and then post it up in the binding section.


Vapor. I would be interested in seeing a side by side test. I don’t know of any other phantom like interface though. I have extensive experience with the Karakoram, Spark and Phantom bindings and in my opinion, the Phantom interface is much better at holding the two halves together, creating torsional rigidness. I hate the sheer effect of split boarding and have gone way out of my way in the past trying to firm up my set ups. I have added extra K clips in the center and the best was the bar between the tour brackets. Now that i am on Phantom, i don’t consider it an issue at all ( the high quality of my Venture board helps too). I am not one to care what others ride, I am not trying to preach or say that Phantom's are the best or anything like that. To each his own. But i would place a friendly bet that the Phantom interface holds the spit together better than the other systems. If i get time, i will take pics and see if i can prove it. If a test shows otherwise, then oh well, but i really think you will see the difference if you get the chance to test Phantoms.

_________________
Fast and Smooth
Riding since "88"
2013 Venture zepher 165-27W
Phantom Alpha's w TLT5s
DIY 168 Skynk Ape, RC
Lib Tech T.Rice 164.5
Spark R&D Afterburner tesla'


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Fri May 16, 2014 3:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:34 pm
Posts: 303
Location: kelowna bc canada
Hey Travis, just soursing the 7075 t6 plate online right now,then onto the machine shop. This will be for my solid at least as Ive run cateks before and prefer my split as my split bindings sit lower on the board.
I know how you feel when you say you want something that doesn't flex underfoot and am going to machine them up to a tight tolerance just for the test and then go from there.
As for what people ride ,don't care at all as long as were out there having a good time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Fri May 16, 2014 4:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1519
Location: Colorado
I will go on record as saying I do prefer some flex under foot. Here is what I mean. Years ago, I was riding a 179 CM Morrow Matt Goodwill board with direct mounted Sno Pro toe and heel pieces. This was back when many boards required drilling, like skis, to mount. The next season I got the new Matt Goodwill board from Morrow, but now it had inserts, and, a dedicated Morrow only insert pattern. So I had to try Morrow's traditional strap bindings. The Morrow bindings had an aluminum baseplate likely 6061, bent into a U shape to cradle the boot. Of course the form of the aluminum baseplate made it very, very rigid. I hated it. It felt like the board had a dead, flat spot in its flex, gone was the great ride of the previous years board. Of course my direct mounted toe and heel pieces did not inhibit the designed flex pattern of the board at all.
After that, when I switched away from hard boots and rode soft boots for a number of years, I preferred Burton's carbon loaded baseplates. They were fairly stiff and responsive, but not as stiff as a bent aluminum baseplate, and did not give the dead ride feeling that all the aluminum bindings had.
When I started splitting, I realized pretty quickly that I would be going back to hard boots, it just made so much sense, and the new AT boots that were coming out were really light and relatively soft. Also, the Spark binding, even for all its considerable innovation, also resulted in a bit of that dead feeling which I remembered from aluminum strap bindings on solid boards. The Voile plate, by virtue of its shape, is pretty rigid as well, but it is fairly narrow, and the pucks allow for some give (until they break).
Now with the Phantoms I feel like I have it all. The board halves are held in plane, the toe to heel response is really, really stiff and good, and the baseplate of the binding, being a flat plate of 7075, has some flex and give (especially medially and laterally) and allows the board to flex relatively naturally. I would not want the baseplate to be absolutely rigid, I like it to flex some along with the board (lengthwise), but toe to heel, I want response, and this is exactly what the Phantom bindings are designed to do.
One other note. In discussion with Klem (Venture owner/designer), he noted that sometimes really stiff metal bindings will damage boards at their edges, where they point load the top sheet. Since the Phantom baseplate by design rests directly on the topsheet of the board, some flex is engineered in, as well as the corners having some radius to them, as to not overly stress the board and cause premature failure.

_________________
Never Summer Prospector 167X, furberg 173 DIY, Dynafit TLT5/6 Mountain , Phantom Bindings, BD Glidelite Skins
Quiver Killer inserts

http://protectourwinters.org/
http://14ersnowboardproject.homestead.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Fri May 16, 2014 8:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:34 pm
Posts: 303
Location: kelowna bc canada
I guess I should rephrase and use the term "keep the board in plane" and not use the word "flex". that is what is being tested.
Most metal hardboot bindings have a small bolting area and use rubber dampening rings to allow for a more natural board flex,even to a point that a few years ago people were running lexan plates under their bindings to soften point loading to keep them from damaging their boards.
Phantoms by design have a large footprint to work as splitboard bindings. they may flex to allow board bend naturally and work when they are close to 0 to 20 degrees but when you run more aggresive angles as i do the "dead spot" would become huge.That is why stayed with overlaping delrin pucks.
Now I know what your going to say,most people don't run aggressive angles. What works for you doesn't work for other people, that ok,not better or worse.
As for test that i will post in the binding section when i'm done they wil be as close to a phantom base plate, mounted with typical 0 to 20 degree angles


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: La Sportiva Sideral Boots
PostPosted: Fri May 16, 2014 8:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1519
Location: Colorado
Vapor: Pretty much agreed. Phantom bindings do not allow more than 30 degree angles, their partially oval shape compensates somewhat for the property which you are describing, but these bindings were never meant to be used at angles over 30 degrees, and indeed do not allow for angles over 30 degrees. For sure, Phantom Bindings are designed to suit the riding styles of 99.9% of backcountry freeriders who ride at stance angles of <31degrees.
Note that with a splitboard, those who prefer high angle stances, would be better off with a totally different design than that offered by Voile style pucks or Phantoms, as a board interface system at such large angles does not distribute forces across the board very evenly: looks like a potential oppurtunity for someone to develop a binding for the ten or twenty riders riding higher angles in the backcountry, with an interface which crosses the board at right angles, and then a binding above which allows for the stance angle. Of course, this would be heavier though.
I ride at 24-27 F and 3-7 degrees (positive not duck) R. No problems or dead feel at these angles. Also note that this season Keffler made two versions, the very limited production lighter, softer flexing and semi-experimental Pho, and the slightly stiffer proven Alpha model. I suspect he will merge these together for the 14/15 season but am not sure exactly what will happen.
I am not sure how applicable it is to talk about solid board carving bindings here, as these work in an entirely different fashion to what goes on with a splitboard (angles always over 45 degrees, high off of the board surface, much stiffer boots, very narrow boards, binding mounted from the center with damping at the edges, often mounted on a separate plate system, very little or no concern for weight, etc...)
In any case, all good discussion.

_________________
Never Summer Prospector 167X, furberg 173 DIY, Dynafit TLT5/6 Mountain , Phantom Bindings, BD Glidelite Skins
Quiver Killer inserts

http://protectourwinters.org/
http://14ersnowboardproject.homestead.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  





Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group